Posted on 05/03/2009 3:31:20 PM PDT by Zakeet
Today's Washington Post Web site carries the Associated Press story "Who's Watching News Scorecards on Obama?" Written by David Bauder, the piece begins by reporting:
As President Barack Obama passed his 100th day in office last week, two studies judged that the news media has given him more coverage, and more positive coverage, than his two predecessors at the same point in their terms.
Paragraphs later comes one explanation of the fawning mainstream media coverage:
The newscasts reflect reality, said Rick Kaplan, executive producer of the "CBS Evening News." He said he believed that the president has done extraordinarily well. "Everybody, including Republicans, would have to say that his first 100 days have been great," he said.
No doubt Kaplan would be astounded to learn that not everyone agrees that Obama's first 100 days have been so terrific. Today's Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll, for example, finds that 43 percent of voters disapprove of Obama's performance. Moreover, 32 percent of the nation's voters strongly disapprove.
Kaplan went on in the article to explain:
"You cover what's out there," Kaplan said. "Everybody gets upset. If you cover somebody too hard, his supporters think you're being unfair. If you cover somebody too soft, his opponents think you're too soft. Across his four years, or eight years, whatever it is, there will be plenty for people on all sides to not like or love. It will balance itself out inevitably."
I find it interesting that Kaplan speaks of covering "somebody too hard" or "too soft." Factually reporting news would seem to leave little room for such subjectivity. Of course, factually reporting news doesn't appeal to much of the mainstream media. They have a dog in this fight and don't care if their audiences know it.
The incredibly favorable coverage of Obama has again demonstrated the blatant bias that permeates much of the press. Yet, somehow, magically, we're expected to accept that eventually "it will balance itself out."
Sure. I believe that.
Looks like Obama has lost all his “moderates” and now all he has as supporters are firebreathing maniac moonbats.
I don’t think they were great, and without me, nobody can be “everybody”. What about the 34% of the public that think he stinks?
Really, I guess I’m not like ‘everybody’ because I think he and his first 100 days thoroughly $ucked...
hey kaplan....we are part of “eveyrone” and...we don’t say what you want us to say or what you think wwe should say. We say what we want to say and we don’t think the President’s first 100 days have been great! Quite the opposite.
Rick Kaplan is absolutely one of the most vicious monsters ever to be employed in broadcast news. I did not work for him at CNN but several friends
did and every moment working for that giant fat pig was hell
on earth. It is unimaginable that a guy who has failed so many times
is able to rise to the top. He is a partisan hack and has absolutely
no business being in news. He is typical of the hideous Dems who
work in the news business and government. Personally repugnant
but always declaring what a great guy they are.
Remember, biggest and stinkiest TURD always floats to the top.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.